So, here’s the deal: AAN has thrived and grown exponentially due, in part, to the enthusiasm, energy and insight that people bring to the “conversation”. Having blogged for nearly five years, the number of comments on AAN is truly impressive.
The downside is that a growing number of comments are far from constructive, insightful, interesting or valuable. Many of them are offensive, aggressive, personal rants and uninteresting. I recently took down a comment, for example, that made a completely unsubstantiated allegation against a Nortel executive. There is absolutely no room for this kind of thing.
I’ve tried to provide some guidelines and light moderation over the past few months but it doesn’t seem to be effective.
So, I’m going to try to crowdsource a solution by asking you what approach should be taken.
Should I start to aggressively moderate comments that don’t add anything to the conversation, which involves a lot of work and becomes a very subjective process? Should I ban certain commenters if there’s enough people believe they’re not adding to the conversation. Or should I leave well enough alone.
Some idiot may post something completely false, but who will take it seriously? Only the other idiots I'm sure it's a pleasure for yourself or other officials to come out and clear things up every once in a while.
Mr Real
Nobody but you cares what happened years ago on what yahoo message board and who call you by what name back then. it's your life, you don't HAVE to grow up, but seriously . . . isn't this story getting old?
less
Nortel doesn't care what happened to their stock 6 weeks ago, much less months, or even 6 years ago. Mondays' “Ever forward” as spoken by the CEO is all a potential customer and/or stock buyer needs to research.
less
Nortel doesn't care what happened to their stock 6 weeks ago, much less months, or even 6 years ago. Mondays' “Ever forward” as spoken by the CEO is all a potential customer and/or stock buyer needs to research.
A Comment Conundrum
So, here’s the deal: AAN has thrived and grown exponentially due, in part, to the enthusiasm, energy and insight that people bring to the “conversation”. Having blogged for nearly five years, the number of comments on AAN is truly impressive.
The downside is that a growing number of comments are far from constructive, insightful, interesting or valuable. Many of them are offensive, aggressive, personal rants and uninteresting. I recently took down a comment, for example, that made a completely unsubstantiated allegation against a Nortel executive. There is absolutely no room for this kind of thing.
I’ve tried to provide some guidelines and light moderation over the past few months but it doesn’t seem to be effective.
So, I’m going to try to crowdsource a solution by asking you what approach should be taken.
Should I start to aggressively moderate comments that don’t add anything to the conversation, which involves a lot of work and becomes a very subjective process? Should I ban certain commenters if there’s enough people believe they’re not adding to the conversation. Or should I leave well enough alone.
Any constructive thoughts would be appreciated.
Technorati Tags: blogs, Nortel